Replies

You have not asked me a single question, you have merely sat back and said I was wrong: I suggest you do your own research because you obviously have no data to refute my assertions or you would have provided it. I will include a link to help you out with the total debt burden since I have that link right on my desk top. Going forward, please present any of YOUR assertions which would contradict mine and I will be happy to address them and who knows, maybe I will learn something new. I asked you to post the sources for the numbers that prove your assertions about Fed ownership of Treasury debt as compared to foreign ownership of debt. You never gave your source for "Finally, estimates say that the American people are in debt to the tune of over $40 trillion at present" According to mwhodges.home.att.net total public and private sector debt excluding contingent liabilites is $48.4 Trillion. You never explained "and feeding the banking system with unlimited profits". Who earns those unlimited profits? Or how much those profits are? No source for "The Treasury securities you speak of are sold FIRST to the Fed" I suggest that anyone keeping track of this thread, not you Todd because you are an idiot If you say so, noob. First, incorporate the Federal Reserve System into the U.S. Treasury where all new money is created by government as money, not interest-bearing debt, and spent into circulation to promote the general welfare. Good way to pump up inflation, idiot. How is government spending money into the system MORE inflationary than allowing a central bank to loan it? Money is being created by the same process except under AMI's proposal there is no attendant debt, saving taxpayers BILLIONS in interest. Second, halt the banks privilege to create money You still haven't shown how they create money while lending less than their deposits. Ok, one more time. Banks create money when they use a deposit as the basis for a new loan then immediately return the money to the depositor. When you deposit $1000 in the bank and they use that as the basis for an $800 loan, THEN YOU COME BACK THE VERY NEXT DAY AND REMOVE THE $1000, that does not mean the $800 check they wrote the borrower disappears by some kind of magic. The money they loaned is REAL money that the borrower is using to pay for things, yet the original deposit that served to create that loan is no longer in the bank. Once again, WHERE DID THE $800 COME FROM??? by ending the fractional reserve system in a gentle and elegant way. By causing a new Great Depression? LOL! All the past monetized private credit is converted into U.S. government money. Huh? Banks then act as intermediaries accepting savings deposits and loaning them out to borrowers Exactly how is that different from what they do now? AMI is proposing to replace ALL existing Federal Reserve Notes with actual hard cash in the form of United States Notes. Every FRN in the banking system would be replaced by actual cash, so the banks would not suffer a loss, and going forward banks would ONLY be allowed to loan ACTUAL cash held in their vaults that BELONGED to the bank. They would no longer be allowed to loan depositors money unless the depositor agreed to allow the bank to hold their cash for the full term of the loan. Fractional reserve banking would be prohibited.

I suggest you do your own research because you obviously have no data to refute my assertions or you would have provided it.

I know you're an ignorant noob, but the way it works is if you make an assertion, you should provide a source that backs you up.

According to mwhodges.home.att.net total public and private sector debt excluding contingent liabilites is $48.4 Trillion.

Adding government debt to private debt and then claiming the American people are in debt is just a little bit (okay, a lot dishonest). And discussing debt without including assets is pointless. My debt has doubled in the last 10 years. Wow! My net worth has increased by over 900%. My debt doesn't sound as scary now, does it?

How is government spending money into the system MORE inflationary than allowing a central bank to loan it?

You'd have to compare how much the government currently borrows to how much the Fed buys in Treasury securities. But if you did that, you wouldn't have made the stupid mistakes you did upthread.

Banks create money when they use a deposit as the basis for a new loan then immediately return the money to the depositor.

But they can't do that. If the depositor pulls $1000 out, in your example, they'd have to shrink loans by $800. I know you don't understand that either.

AMI is proposing to replace ALL existing Federal Reserve Notes with actual hard cash in the form of United States Notes.

FRNs are bad but United States Notes are good? That's funny!

and going forward banks would ONLY be allowed to loan ACTUAL cash held in their vaults that BELONGED to the bank.

So, they'd be able to loan 100% of deposits instead of the current 90%. How is that better?

They would no longer be allowed to loan depositors money unless the depositor agreed to allow the bank to hold their cash for the full term of the loan.

Reserve requirements are lower (maybe 0%) on long term deposits already.

Fractional reserve banking would be prohibited.

Well, 100% isn't a fraction. So what?

Please learn how to format. It's hard enough following your stupid posts, don't make it harder than it has to be.

HTML Bootcamp

The basic issue with Fractional Reserve Banking is that it is based on being able to create multiple claims upon every dollar held in reserve.

There is no doubt the scheme also depends on the law of averages, such that, on average enough dollars are held so that even unusually high demands for dollars in the form of cash can be dealt with. With the bottomless Central Bank (in this case the Federal Reserve) running the printing presses in a support role, the bank cannot “run out” of cash as long as it has sufficient other assets such as performing bank loans, bonds, etc.

However, for a person who wants to be strictly honest, the scheme, when it works in conjunction with other fractional reserve banks, does in fact create money out of thin air, out of nothing, because, at its core, it is lending out the same money multiple times. It is, a “money factory”.

In another context, say that of a bookkeeper for a small business who decides to use the company money for personal use for a few days because it won’t be needed for the payroll until the end of the week, it would be a crime, a form of fraud or theft.

This would all be academic or philosophical except that sometimes shocks occur to the system and the bank is prevented from performing and being able to really honor all demands the account holders place on it to redeem their accounts. It is only a matter of time before only a limited number of claims on the same dollar of deposit can be honored. We really found this out when Roosevelt closed the banks for a “holiday”, to stop withdrawal demands.

If the Federal Reserve ever announces that it will “guarantee liquidity”, which it did during the 9/11 crisis when Wall Street was prevented from functioning due, it is saying that the door is open to any amount of dollars that any financial institution thinks it needs to meet the demands of business to continue to function.

But there is no lender of last resort for the US Federal Reserve.

While I regard the dollar a generally safe (except from deliberate inflation), I would not make the serious mistake of confusing money in the form of paper dollars with wealth. I would also make sure I had at least a little of my wealth in the form of gold bullion coins. Their liquidity is never in question. And I would not keep them in a “safe deposit box”, a place that might be distinctly unsafe during a crisis. Roosevelt issued an order during his bank holiday that all safe deposit boxes could only be opened in the presence of an IRS agent.